Ron Paul announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination for President yesterday. Ron appeals to many on the left because he is strongly antiwar and supports legalization of marijuana. However, he is not a supportable alternative, because he would dismantle Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public education, regulation of criminal corporations, programs to support the poor, etc. He would even kill FEMA, abandoning disaster victims to their fate. He would plunge us back to the day of Herbert Hoover. In addition, he opposes the Civil Rights Act. He claims it’s only over property rights, but his record demonstrates that he is a true Republican, that is, a liar.
This morning, Libertarian hero Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) announced that he will join the motley GOP presidential field, marking his third run for the office. Offering further insight into his presidential sensibility, Paul told CNN host Wolf Blitzer today that he would do away with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), even at a time of unprecedented need.
Viewing the agency as unconstitutional, Paul questioned why federal funds should pay to protect citizens from natural disasters and concluded, “It’s a moral hazard to say that government is always going to take care of us when we do dumb things“…
…Paul’s brand of morality is particularly callous given the numerous natural disasters destroying Americans’ homes and livelihoods across the country right now, from floods to tornadoes to wildfire fires. Gov. Nathan Deal (R-GA) requested FEMA to respond to the devastating tornadoes that tore across the southern states, leaving at least 290 dead. Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS) is telling Mississippians that are victims of disaster-level flooding to register with FEMA to receive federal aid…
Inserted from <Think Progress>
There’s video there, but it cannot be imbedded, so I cannot share it, but click through to see him make this outlandish claim.
In addition, Paul would make it legal for business to discriminate. He would allow “whites only” businesses, such as restaurants and real estate developments, stepping is back into segregation. Here’s video. Hat Tip: TPM
Is he truthful about this? Here are four quotes from 1992.
…"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be." – Ron Paul, 1992
"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." – Ron Paul, 1992
"We don’t think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That’s true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such." – Ron Paul, 1992
"What else do we need to know about the political establishment than that it refuses to discuss the crimes that terrify Americans on grounds that doing so is racist? Why isn’t that true of complex embezzling, which is 100 percent white and Asian?" – Ron Paul, 1992… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <RealChange.org>
Can there be any doubt that he considers black people different because they are black? Ron Paul is just another racist Republican.
Furthermore he’s a religious extremist. Paul is making a pilgrimage to kiss the ring of Ralph Reed, a Republican pseudo-Christian, one of the most corrupt and most discredited in history. Reed lobbied for sweat shops and sex slaves in the Marianas, disguising it as bringing Christ to the workers. For Paul to pander to such a man is not just evil. It’s idiocy.
Thus Ron Paul is a Republican where idiocy and racism meet. QED.
18 Responses to “Ron Paul: Where Idiocy and Racism Meet”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Proof that insanity runs in families.
LOL Leslie! No argument from me!! 😀
Where the real idiocy is ;; this bigot is considered to be a serious candidate for POTUS !!!
Part of the problem is that some lefty-loonies see this guy as a protest vote against Obama. The see peace and pot and look no deeper. That’s why exposing him over and over again is so important.
TomCat you are absolutely correct. Why anyone in their right mind would vote for anyone based solely on one or two issues is beyond me.
Welcome Rusty. 🙂
Thanks! It boggles the mind!
What Ron Paul would like to impose on us is usually referred to as “Social Darwinism.” Of course he doesn’t dare call it that because it would imply that he gives some credit to Darwin, which wouldn’t go over well with the hyper-religious nut cases he panders to.
John, you’re absolutely correct. Frankly, I think deep down he’d like to see abortion expanded, but can’t go there, because of the Theocons. I’d say more, but you hit on part of the subject of today’s lead article. I think you’ll like it.
Any chance that Ron Paul and actual reality will ever intersect?
Nah, I didn’t think so either.
Either is indeed prescient.
It’s too bad Paul is a racist as he does have some good ideas. Still, it’s better to know now so we don’t vote for him, even in the primaries. 🙄
Exactly, Nicolai. I’m down with his peace stance and have no objection to his pot stance, but beyond that, he’s a monster.
Guess who else wants to get rid of FEMA….. your boy Ralph Nader :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUjL2FXBWac
Also, this post doesn’t really discuss Dr. Paul’s foreign and monetary policies, two areas where any level headed person can agree is not “idiocy”.
Dr. Paul is not trying to “dismantle … public education” even though he wants to remove the Department of Education. If you have ever had any experience with public education, you would know that the Federal government mandates enormous amounts of regulations to the public schools and does not provide enough money to pay for those regulations. That is called an “unfunded mandate” and Dr. Paul is attempting to get rid of them. Plus the federal government’s percentage for a public high school’s budget is roughly 2 or 3%, not very significant.
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid have been very controversial topics for politics since the Great Society. Dr. Paul does not take part in any welfare system, or benefit system as a congressman and wants a nation free from unnecessary taxes and regulations.
Dr. Paul wants to “dismantle…regulation of criminal corporations” because he is a non-hypocritical laissez-faire economist. Read into his economic policies before you attempt to address them.
Dr. Paul is often referred to as a “religious extremist”. This title is placed upon him when opponents don’t have any other advantage on his ideas and political view. He is a religious man, yes. But he respects the aspect of religious freedom and is tolerant of gay marriage, even though disagreeing with the practice, but would allow them to marry. He is civil rights first.
Like religion, opponents attack the racism card. Those claims are non factual and a cheap political tactic. His political stance is not “idiocy” but a different point of view from the one party system we have now.
Welcome Lego. 🙂
Just an FYI. I thank Ralph Nader for the reign of GW ChickenHawk, so saying he wants to dismantle FEMA too is confirmation that Paul’s desire to do so is idiotic.
I agree that there should be no unfunded mandates. Funding the mandates is a far better solution.
As for the rest of your claims, you have a right to your own opinions, not to your own facts.
The Republicans have been trying to destroy public education for a very long time. First they cut off funding then say “Hey it doesn’t work!” Well no shit you cut off all the funding. They want to indoctrinate our children in their revisionist history and make people accepting of their twisted logic. It’s the dumbing down of America courtesy of the GOP.
Right Rusty. Paul wants to end all federal involvement in education and return the authority to the states. In some states, like mine (Oregon), that would bot be a problem, but we have a responsibility to teach children in Texas, Mississippi, South Carolina, etc., that the civil war is over, etc.
Once upon a time I thought Ron Paul might be a Libertarian alternative to Democrats or Republicans who when you get right down to it, regardless what they say when they are campaigning, end up much the same when elected. Silly me, when I looked more closely at his opinions and suggestions for addressing the ills of the nation, I see someone clearly out of touch with reality.
Welcome Earl. 🙂
I’m glad you took a deeper look.